"Knowledge will forever govern ignorance

 and a people who mean to be their own governors

 must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."

Saturday, December 31, 2005


In October, Atlanta Journal Constitution's cartoonist Mike Luckovich used the names of the fallen in Iraq to create “Why?

Now, Georgia teenager Danielle Ansley has created the answer with an updated list of our nation’s heroes. Her response to Luckovich shown below, appears in today's Atlanta Journal Constitution: (Via Michelle Malkin)


At 11:46 PM, Blogger terryp said...

Yes, freedom. Freedom from life.

Those soldiers' bodies are free from the lives they once had, so that Iraqis can live under an islamic regime friendly to Iran. Nice priorities. If that's how much you value their lives, you're absolutely sick.

At 1:18 AM, Blogger Enlighten said...

Ah Terry, you’re back. Happy New Year!

Are you under the impression the American service men and women who lost their lives in Iraq were dupes with no idea what they were doing or why? Give our service men and women a bit more credit.

We understand the the purpose and significance their mission, you apparently do not. And you are most gloomy about the prospects for Iraq’s future. Are you always such a pessimist?

The future is never certain, but one thing is for sure, we are all better off with the Saddam Hussein regime removed from power. We’d be curious to know why you think otherwise.

What do you mean by “nice priorities”- our preference for freedom? What are yours?

In terms of valuing the lives of those who have died, we value them greatly. We morn their loss, but we believe they have not died in vain. Do you think it’s possible many, many times the number of lives lost in Iraq may actually be saved in the long run as a result of our country’s actions in the GWOT which includes the mission in Iraq?

Finally, do you think everyone that disagrees with you is “sick”?

At 12:37 PM, Blogger terryp said...

I believe our service men and women signed a contract promising to defend this country, and I believe that contract was violated by sending them to fight a country which did not pose a threat to us. This is what I mean by "nice priorities": violating and abusing the trust of our military service members and hence weakening our military power in the short and long term. Look at recruitment stats if you need evidence of our weakened military. People have lost trust in the military and fewer are willing to be used as pawns.

I don't fault the service members - they are dutifully following orders. It's the civilian leadership and their supporters who are the problem. You're included.

How do you interpret the new Islamic regime that was recently elected in Iraq? Is that progress for you?

Did I ever say I didn't think Saddam Hussein should be removed from power? If so I must have missed that. Remind me where I said that. I would have prefered to have had it done by a covert operation doing a targetted hit job.

You support a war in Iraq which diverted resources from the real war on terror: killing terrorists. Guess how many 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi. You know the answer. ZERO. How many were Saudi? Come on...you know this. Why haven't we eviscerated Saudi Arabia yet?

Unfortunately, you don't seem to understand that Saddam viewed al Qaeda as a threat to his secular regime. Your priorities have led to the creation of a whole new training ground for terrorists. Those are bad priorities in my book.

I think anyone who would abuse our military service members by sending them to fight a war which played no part in the security of our country is sick. Very, very sick and twisted. Based on your belief of how the military should be abused, you qualify with flying colors for this honor.

At 10:48 PM, Blogger terryp said...

This is what the war is doing to our military:

US Rep. Murtha says he wouldn't join military now

WASHINGTON, Jan 2 (Reuters) - Rep. John Murtha, a key Democratic voice who favors pulling U.S. troops from Iraq, said in remarks airing on Monday that he would not join the U.S. military today.

A decorated Vietnam combat veteran who retired as a colonel after 37 years in the U.S. Marine Corps, Murtha told ABC News' "Nightline" program that Iraq "absolutely" was a wrong war for President George W. Bush to have launched.

"Would you join (the military) today?," he was asked in an interview taped on Friday.

"No," replied Murtha of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives subcommittee that oversees defense spending and one of his party's leading spokesmen on military issues.

"And I think you're saying the average guy out there who's considering recruitment is justified in saying 'I don't want to serve'," the interviewer continued.

"Exactly right," said Murtha, who drew White House ire in November after becoming the first ranking Democrat to push for a pullout of U.S. forces from Iraq as soon as it could be done safely.


And a poll by Military Times:

Support for
President George W. Bush's
Iraq policy has fallen among the US armed forces to just 54 percent from 63 percent a year ago, according to a poll by the magazine group Military Times.
With 61 percent of respondents saying they had served in Iraq or
Afghanistan, only 58 percent believed that Bush had the military's best interests at heart, a sharp decline from 69 percent a year before.

At 1:03 AM, Blogger Enlighten said...

How is it that you are able to claim Iraq posed no threat and yet call for “a covert operation doing a targeted hit job.”? It seems we agree on the mission, but merely disagree on the tactics for getting the job done. And while we are on the subject, would you care to explain how your covert operation would have been carried out? Who would have been targeted for a hit and what would have happened after we managed to pull off this caper?

You believe we have violated and abused the trust of our military service members, why? Because service men and woman have been killed in Iraq? What if some American service members had been killed trying to pull off your covert operation, does your choice of tactic somehow make a difference?

Here’s an in-depth report on recruiting in the US military completed by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Perhaps you should read it and disabuse yourself of the notion of lost trust by the military. For 2005 statistics for Army recruitment and retention, try reading this page.

As far the poll you cite - Did you read the entire article or just the parts that fit your opinion? "Military Times, which publishes popular magazines for each of the US military branches including Army Times and Navy Times, cautioned that its poll, of 1,215 active-duty servicemen, is not necessarily representative of the military as a whole."

What does Jack Murtha’s being unwilling to join the military today have to do with anything? We’ll bet Ted Kennedy wouldn’t join either. As a matter of fact most people didn’t join the military pre or post Iraq invasion, but more people are in the U.S. military today than before 9/11. How’d that happen? FYI, we particularly liked the part where the interviewer tells Murtha what “he’s saying.”

A weakened military? How do you come to that conclusion? It was our understanding a battle tested military was a stronger military.

How do you reach the conclusion the United States is not fighting the “real war on terror” and resources are being diverted? Where should we be fighting instead of Iraq and Afghanistan? How did you get the impression the administration is not using a variety of tactics in other parts of the world to prevent attacks in the U.S. and to round up terrorists? Information abounds about the GWOT, successes we’ve had and the tactics the government is employing - financial, diplomatic and military. We’ll even bet they are some covert operations going on.

Perhaps you could explain why people who support the troops and our civilian leadership are a problem. A problem to whom? The terrorists and their supporters?

Unfortunately, it is you lacking understanding of the connection between Saddam and terrorists. You might want to take a look at this ABC News video on the subject. The report aired pre 9/11 and pre Bush administration.

Have you always been under the impression Iraq was not a threat to the security of our country? If so what was up with the UN embargoes, resolutions, weapons inspectors, no fly zone patrols, bombings and official U.S. policy of regime in Iraq under President Clinton? And why did you write that you preferred “a covert operation doing a targeted hit job” in Iraq if that country “played no part in the security of our country?”

You ask “why haven't we eviscerated Saudi Arabia yet?” The reasons are too numerous to mention here, but perhaps you could tell us why you are suggesting we should? Are you aware that all 19 9/11 hijackers are dead? Are you aware it was not the Saudi government behind the 9/11 attacks, but the hijackers all spent time in terrorist training camps in Afghanistan? That might have has something to do with our military action in that country, don't you think?

You ask “how do you interpret the new Islamic regime that was recently elected in Iraq? Is that progress for you?” We must have missed that one. We were under the impression a coalition government was being formed – see the AP article - Sunni deal may bring broad Iraq coalition – dated Jan 3. Sounds like progress to us.

The name calling really didn’t add much to your argument. “Very, very sick and twisted.” If anything is twisted, we’d say it’s your logic

At 4:19 PM, Blogger Jack said...

Although Terry's covert operations sounds dubious, so is Iraq's future. Pointing to Iraqi elections and other concrete accomplishments is a much better defense for the war.

It's not fair to simply dismiss all pessimism with the abstract goal of "freedom". If the Bush administration actually supported "freedom" as much as they harp on about it in speeches, then we'd have a much different policy with China, Saudi Arabia, and other dictatorships.

- Jersey Perspective

At 5:19 PM, Blogger Enlighten said...


Happy New Year! As you probably know we have been pointing out the positive news in Iraq. Still the pessimism from many on the left continues. And as we all know the President provided a long list of reasons for going into Iraq prior to the invasion that are too numerous to get into in the comments section. (The comments are getting longer than our main posts.)

Terry however is stuck on repeating the "Iraq wasn't a threat" meme, but at the same time he gets tangled up with having to agree we are all better off with Saddam Hussein's regime removed from power. That's why he came up with the "dubious" covert operation idea. He’s trying to have it both ways – Saddam’s regime gone without admitting an invasion was necessary.

We thought Danielle Ansley's one word response "Freedom" to the snarky one word question "Why" was great. And considerably more fair if that's the point of each.

If you were an Iraqi, which future would have preferred – a future under Saddam, fully aware of his barbarous rule or a chance for a brighter future under a democratically elected government? As an American, we prefer a future without Saddam in power for the sake of our own country and others.

Would you care to tell us about the policies the Bush administration should have in relation to China, Saudi Arabia, and other dictatorships? Give us a quick overview of our current policies and explain specifically the changes you believe need to be made for the Bush administration to be taken seriously about freedom they “harp” on?

Nice try on changing the subject, though. The post was about Iraq, as were Terry's comments.

At 3:24 PM, Blogger Jack said...

Happy New Year too.

I'm not changing the subject and I didn't propose any different policy for China, Saudi Arabia etc. I was simply stating that if international FREEDOM was such a priority for the U.S govt, then it wouldn't have such nice relations with Saudi Arabia, China etc.

I don't know what I'd think if I was Iraqi. Probably depends on which part of the country I was living in.

- Jersey Perspective

At 5:08 PM, Blogger Enlighten said...


You are trying to change the subject from Iraq to U.S. foreign policy relative to other nations. But since you brought it up, perhaps you could explain what you mean by "such nice relations"? Is that opposed to “not nice relations’?

Do you notice any difference,for example,between the “nice relations” we have with Great Britain and the “nice relations” we have with China? Or the “nice relations” we have with Canada and the ”nice relation” we have with Saudi Arabia? And why if international FREEDOM was really a priority to our government are you so sure our relations would need to different to achieve the objective?

About your preference if you were an Iraqi, think about it for awhile. We’d be curious to know what your circumstances would need to be for you to choose life under Saddam Hussein’s regime.

At 6:05 PM, Blogger Jack said...

Nice means we don't go to war with them or impose sanctions on them.

If I had a family before the invasion and I didn't afterwards, I'd probably prefer the Saddam version.

- Jersey Perspective

At 10:05 PM, Anonymous Nike shox clearance said...

Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts.Any way Ill be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon.

At 1:45 AM, Anonymous Cassius said...

here | this site | this page | there | check this | this site | here

there | this page | check this | this site | here | this page | there | check this

check this | there | this site | here | this page | there | check this


Post a Comment

<< Home

 Contact Us

  • Email Us
  • Blog Roll Us!



  • Atom Feed
  • Bloglines
  • Feedburner
  • Feedster
  • Add to Google
  • Add to My MSN
  • Add to My Yahoo
  • News Is Free

    Recent Posts

  • Observations
  • The Nearly Twelve
  • Jersey Slogan Shirts
  • This Day In History
  • The Four Memes
  • Happy Chanukah!
  • Carnival of The New Jersey Bloggers # 32
  • Merry Christmas!
  • The Spirit Of Christmas
  • NORAD Tracks Santa


  • November 2004
  • December 2004
  • January 2005
  • February 2005
  • March 2005
  • April 2005
  • May 2005
  • June 2005
  • July 2005
  • August 2005
  • September 2005
  • October 2005
  • November 2005
  • December 2005
  • January 2006
  • February 2006
  • March 2006
  • April 2006
  • May 2006
  • June 2006
  • July 2006
  • August 2006
  • September 2006
  • October 2006
  • November 2006
  • December 2006
  • January 2007
  • February 2007
  • March 2007
  • April 2007
  • May 2007
  • June 2007
  • August 2007
  • September 2007
  • October 2007
  • November 2007
  • December 2007
  • January 2008
  • February 2008
  • April 2008
  • November 2008
  • January 2009
  • August 2009
  • September 2009
  • February 2012

    Online Journals

  • National Review

  • Opinion Journal

  • Real Clear Politics

  • Weekly Standard

  • Blog Roll

  • A Blog For All
  • Althouse
  • Ankle Biting Pundits
  • Barista of Bloomfield Avenue
  • Betsy's Page
  • Blue Crab Boulevard
  • Blogs For Condi
  • Bob the Corgi
  • Brainster's Blog
  • BuzzMachine
  • Captain's Quarter's
  • Cinnaman
  • Coalition of the Swilling
  • CWA-NJ
  • Dino's Forum
  • Daily Mail
  • Don Surber
  • DynamoBuzz
  • eCache
  • Exit 4
  • Fausta's Blog
  • GOP Bloggers
  • Instapundit
  • Joe's Journal
  • Kate Spot
  • Kausfiles.com
  • Little Green Footballs
  • Michelle Malkin
  • More Mnmouth Musings
  • Parkway Rest Stop
  • Patrick Ruffini
  • Polipundit
  • Power Line
  • Right Wing News
  • Roger L. Simon
  • The Blue State Conservatives
  • Riehl World View
  • Red Jersey
  • Right, Wing-Nut!
  • Sid in the City
  • Tiger Hawk
  • The Truth Laid Bear
  • Tim Blair
  • Wizbang

  • Sid in the City

    Majority Accountability Project


    New Jersey Blogs


  • 11th and Washington

  • A Blog For All
  • A Planet Where Apes Evolved From Man?!?
  • Armies of Liberation
  • Atlantic Highland Muse
  • Attack of the 15.24 Mete

  • Barista of Bloomfield Avenue
  • BeLow Me
  • Big Windbag
  • Blanton's and Ashton's
  • Blue State Conservatives
  • Burning Feathers
  • BuzzMachine

  • Clifton Blogs
  • Coalition of the Swilling
  • Cobweb Studios
  • CoffeeGrounds
  • Constitutional Conservative
  • Confessions of a Jersey Goddess
  • Corzine Watch
  • Crazy Jackie
  • Cresting Acrocorinthus
  • Cripes, Suzette!

  • Daniella's Misadventures
  • Did I Say That Out Loud
  • Dojo Mojo
  • Dossy's Blog
  • Down the Shore
  • DynamoBuzz

  • eCache
  • Enlighten-NewJersey
  • Eye On Hoboken
  • Exit 4
  • Exit Zero
  • Extreme-Psychosis

  • Fausta's Blog
  • Fausti's Book Quest
  • Fractals of Change
  • Frenchtown NJ Blog

  • GiggleChick
  • Gregg Gethard's Amazing Personal Journey
  • goethe re scape

  • Hoboken Rock City

  • IamBillPower
  • If this is paradise, I wish I had a lawn-mower
  • Imaginary Therapy
  • Inadmissible Evidence

  • Jersey Beat
  • Jersey Perspective
  • Jersey Side
  • Jersey Style
  • Jersey Writers
  • Joe's Journal

  • Karl's Corner
  • Kate Spot

  • Laughing At The Pieces
  • Likelihood of Confusion
  • Liss Is More

  • Mamacita
  • Mary's Lame Attempt at Fame
  • Media in Trouble
  • Michael Carroll
  • Mister Snitch!
  • MucknMire
  • My Life as a Rabid Blog
  • My New Jersey

  • New Jersey Eminent Domain Law
  • NJ Conservative
  • NJ Fiscal Folly
  • New Jersey For Change
  • New Jersey Weblogs
  • NJ Spoken Word
  • Northeast Corridor

  • Parkway Rest Stop
  • Philly2Hoboken.com
  • Poetic Leanings
  • Poor Impulse Control
  • Professor Kim's News Notes
  • Property Tax NJ

  • Rain Angel
  • Riehl World View

  • Shamrocketship
  • Shipwrecks
  • SloppyDawg
  • Sluggo Needs a Nap
  • SmadaNeK
  • Static Silence

  • Tami,The One True
  • Tammany on the Hudson
  • Tequila Shots For The Soul
  • The Art of Getting By
  • The Center of New Jersey Life
  • The Daily Fry
  • The Duc Pond
  • The Jersey Shore Real Estate Bubble
  • The Joy of Soup
  • The Mark(ings) of Zorro
  • The New Wisdom
  • The Nightfly
  • The Opinion Mill
  • The Pink Panther
  • The Political Dogs
  • The Rix Mix
  • This Full House
  • Tiger Hawk
  • Tomato Nation
  • Toxiclabrat
  • Twisty

  • Unbillable Hours
  • Usdin.Net

  • Where Is The Remote
  • Wine Goddess

  • Xpatriated Texan

  • Links

  • NJ Governor
  • NJ Legislature
  • Bob Menendez Information

  • Blog Rings

  • Blog Explosion
  • Blog Directory
  • Blogsnow
  • Blogwise
  • Blogstreet
  • Blogshares
  • Blogarama
  • Blog Digger
  • Daypop
  • Globe of Blogs
  • Blog Search Engine

  • Ecosystem Status

  • Who Links Here